G.M. announcement shakes up U.S. automakers’ transition to electric cars(nytimes.com)
nytimes.com
G.M. announcement shakes up U.S. automakers’ transition to electric cars
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/29/business/general-motors-electric-cars.html
59 comments
I wouldn’t call them “very very” far behind. Reviews of Bolt and Volt were positive, and the cars were technically sound. So they have the capability to engineer a decent electric vehicle.
The problem is going to be the dealers.
With the limited maintenance, regular servicing and less things to break where dealers have historically made their margins. EVs are a threat in this regard and you've already seen this play out with the Bolt/Volt to a degree.
Heck, they wanted ~$300 to run a DPF regen on our truck when it went into limp mode(yay for open-ish OBD protocols so we could do it ourself).
I just don't see them wanting to sell them and without a channel it doesn't matter how good of a product you make.
With the limited maintenance, regular servicing and less things to break where dealers have historically made their margins. EVs are a threat in this regard and you've already seen this play out with the Bolt/Volt to a degree.
Heck, they wanted ~$300 to run a DPF regen on our truck when it went into limp mode(yay for open-ish OBD protocols so we could do it ourself).
I just don't see them wanting to sell them and without a channel it doesn't matter how good of a product you make.
GM definitely has advantages and failings. Their advantage is actual capability in designing and building cars. They are not particularly behind in their ability to build electric cars.
Of course, the Bolt is neither a particularly (universally) attractive car, nor is it produced and distributed to dealerships in quantities sufficient to make a difference.
The charging network is obviously Tesla's cup of tea.
So GM will (almost certainly) make a bunch of appealing electric cars, and they'll get them to dealerships. That alone will make waves, but the charging network will likely need work so that reviews of their cars aren't littered with experience complaints.
It's also easy to debate items like software, updates and driver aids. GM is probably average with software (good enough) and average with updates (terrible). They have plenty of good investments with driver aids though they promise a lot less than Tesla (for now).
Of course, the Bolt is neither a particularly (universally) attractive car, nor is it produced and distributed to dealerships in quantities sufficient to make a difference.
The charging network is obviously Tesla's cup of tea.
So GM will (almost certainly) make a bunch of appealing electric cars, and they'll get them to dealerships. That alone will make waves, but the charging network will likely need work so that reviews of their cars aren't littered with experience complaints.
It's also easy to debate items like software, updates and driver aids. GM is probably average with software (good enough) and average with updates (terrible). They have plenty of good investments with driver aids though they promise a lot less than Tesla (for now).
Have you driven a bolt and a Tesla side by side?
It’s like a blackberry vs an iPhone X right now.
Can they catch up? Sure maybe? But no signs of it yet.
It’s like a blackberry vs an iPhone X right now.
Can they catch up? Sure maybe? But no signs of it yet.
Anecdote isn’t data but when I went from a Chevy Volt (2016) to a Model S (2017) I was surprised at how much worse the computer in my Tesla is.
Bluetooth is unreliable and balky. Speech recognition doesn’t work. The touchscreen is unresponsive - it can take a minute to type in an address. And sometimes the main touchscreen computer freezes and I have to manually reboot it, which means no A/C or radio or navigation for 5 minutes.
I understand that the computer in my Model S isn’t as good as their newer ones. But I have to say the overall experience is terrible. My Volt had a more functional and reliable computer. I’m tempted to buy a new Model S just to upgrade the computer.
All of this is to say that Tesla may have great technology but it is unevenly applied and they are terrible at support.
Bluetooth is unreliable and balky. Speech recognition doesn’t work. The touchscreen is unresponsive - it can take a minute to type in an address. And sometimes the main touchscreen computer freezes and I have to manually reboot it, which means no A/C or radio or navigation for 5 minutes.
I understand that the computer in my Model S isn’t as good as their newer ones. But I have to say the overall experience is terrible. My Volt had a more functional and reliable computer. I’m tempted to buy a new Model S just to upgrade the computer.
All of this is to say that Tesla may have great technology but it is unevenly applied and they are terrible at support.
Try 2021 of both. You were looking at MCU1. They are on MCU2 now, and it looks like the new S/X may be on an even newer MCU. You will find the typing speed and screen responsiveness 100% reversed.
What is the upgrade path for putting an MCU3 in a 2017 Tesla?
Buy another $140k car?
Buy another $140k car?
Yes! In fact I own one of each. A Bolt, a Volt, and a Tesla "S". Each are good in their class. No major problems with any of them. (Actually, the "S" has been in the shop more times than the other two, which have never needed a repair other than routine service.)
It's a shame the "Volt" was discontinued because it was a great concept and the car works well. Unlike the fake "Plug-in Prius" -- which can't go faster than about 30 MPH without the gas engine kicking in -- the Volt is 100% electric on its ~ 50 mile range before the ICE will turn on. I got it for the occasional long drive I need to do.
It's a shame the "Volt" was discontinued because it was a great concept and the car works well. Unlike the fake "Plug-in Prius" -- which can't go faster than about 30 MPH without the gas engine kicking in -- the Volt is 100% electric on its ~ 50 mile range before the ICE will turn on. I got it for the occasional long drive I need to do.
Tesla is a wee bit overrated as a car maker. They just arent quality.
Their technology however, is mind blowing.
Their technology however, is mind blowing.
> GM is very very far behind, but they are now deadly serious about owning a majority of the EV market.
Great, I wish them well in that endeavour though I doubt they will ever get a majority of the Market share at this point given all the horrible mistakes they've made since the 70s, but they have a lot of catching up to do to get even close to its main US competitor (Tesla) and Hyundai, who also partnered up with LG and has a national interest in seeing each other succeed, has made a lot of progress in EV market. Perhaps a possible partnership with Apple could give them a much needed jump start since Apple thinks it wants to get into the Auto Industry.
But if Toyota's miracle battery comes to fruition and meets expectations then that could be the real dark horse and make all but maybe Tesla the only real competitor anymore.
It's very clear to see that other than some mainstays like the Charger/Hellcat variants, a high end Cadillac SUV and Corvette GM don't seem to be doing much in the ICE department worth staying in that game long term to keep the brand(s) alive and even the Hummer is being offered as an EV.
I've only been in a late model volt during a lyft and to be honest it all felt incredibly cheap, like a base model Jetta assembled in Mexico cheap. Nothing seemed to be remarkably good about it and the driver said he got under a 100 miles of range so he hung around the local college bars and charged on campus until the next hail, and while Teslas aren't exactly amazing when it comes to interiors either, the Model 3 I drove months earlier was far superior.
I'd decry there bailout in 2008, but if they're really taking EV seriously and the Biden administration is pushing for EV then maybe it was all worth it in the end for this perfect storm situation, as so much of GM's lineup were mainly disposable cars that ended up in the scrap heap after 7-10 years due to unreliability. I will say their LTX V8s engines were being swapped in every imaginable chassis up until a few years ago, so they probably could just keep making crate engines and parts with existing infrastructure and still make a profit. Otherwise its game over for a ton of people who will need to buy multiple engines/chassis just to keep one running until they pull a Cuba and create their own backyard OEM parts supplier alternative.
Edit: Mopar stuff is not Chrysler.
Great, I wish them well in that endeavour though I doubt they will ever get a majority of the Market share at this point given all the horrible mistakes they've made since the 70s, but they have a lot of catching up to do to get even close to its main US competitor (Tesla) and Hyundai, who also partnered up with LG and has a national interest in seeing each other succeed, has made a lot of progress in EV market. Perhaps a possible partnership with Apple could give them a much needed jump start since Apple thinks it wants to get into the Auto Industry.
But if Toyota's miracle battery comes to fruition and meets expectations then that could be the real dark horse and make all but maybe Tesla the only real competitor anymore.
It's very clear to see that other than some mainstays like the Charger/Hellcat variants, a high end Cadillac SUV and Corvette GM don't seem to be doing much in the ICE department worth staying in that game long term to keep the brand(s) alive and even the Hummer is being offered as an EV.
I've only been in a late model volt during a lyft and to be honest it all felt incredibly cheap, like a base model Jetta assembled in Mexico cheap. Nothing seemed to be remarkably good about it and the driver said he got under a 100 miles of range so he hung around the local college bars and charged on campus until the next hail, and while Teslas aren't exactly amazing when it comes to interiors either, the Model 3 I drove months earlier was far superior.
I'd decry there bailout in 2008, but if they're really taking EV seriously and the Biden administration is pushing for EV then maybe it was all worth it in the end for this perfect storm situation, as so much of GM's lineup were mainly disposable cars that ended up in the scrap heap after 7-10 years due to unreliability. I will say their LTX V8s engines were being swapped in every imaginable chassis up until a few years ago, so they probably could just keep making crate engines and parts with existing infrastructure and still make a profit. Otherwise its game over for a ton of people who will need to buy multiple engines/chassis just to keep one running until they pull a Cuba and create their own backyard OEM parts supplier alternative.
Edit: Mopar stuff is not Chrysler.
FYI - The Dodge Charger Hellcat is a car made by Stellantis, which formed from the merger of a French car group and an Italian/American car group. Its brands are:
Abarth, Alfa Romeo, Chrysler, Citroën, Dodge, DS, Fiat, Jeep, Lancia, Maserati, Opel, Peugeot, Ram and Vauxhall.
This company was just created and listed on the NYSE on Jan. 19th, 2021.
This company was just created and listed on the NYSE on Jan. 19th, 2021.
Err.. forgot Dodge was Chrysler and was bought by Fiat, you're right and I need to get some rest this WSB thing has been been horible for my sleep patterns.
Anyone else get a flash of content and then a totally blank page on iOS?
Reader view shows only the page title and nothing else.
I installed Hush last week, but even disabling content blockers doesn’t fix it.
Reader view shows only the page title and nothing else.
I installed Hush last week, but even disabling content blockers doesn’t fix it.
Same here on iOS14 iphone11, with a pihole with default settings. Worked fine on chrome for windows with the same pihole, privacy badger and ublock origin, so I think it’s a separate issue to content blocking.
i had same, but requesting desktop site worked
Their paywall is broken -- it should show you a flash of content, then ask you for money. You'll have to use something like archive.is.
But while G.M.’s U-turn materialized in the weeks after the election, five of its competitors — BMW, Ford, Honda, Volkswagen and Volvo — had already legally bound themselves to tougher fuel economy standards in a deal with California. G.M. is not party to that agreement and can operate under the Trump rules until Mr. Biden’s policies are enacted, potentially giving the company more time to invest in research and technology.
Interesting graf. The implication seems to be ICE fuel economy regs may be/have been sucking R&D money away from the electric switchover. We absolutely need to avoid writing fuel economy regulations in a way that disincentivizes electric investment.
Interesting graf. The implication seems to be ICE fuel economy regs may be/have been sucking R&D money away from the electric switchover. We absolutely need to avoid writing fuel economy regulations in a way that disincentivizes electric investment.
At medium time scales the only important factor is battery cost; year to year product decisions probably don't have much impact on R&D spending there.
Later: I wonder to what extent electric vehicles are already part of the plan to meet the CA deal. I've looked for a minute and not found anything informative.
Later: I wonder to what extent electric vehicles are already part of the plan to meet the CA deal. I've looked for a minute and not found anything informative.
55mpg steady state for a gas engine must require some pretty ridiculous engineering.
I can see 55mpg in a plug-in hybrid as long as the battery has charge to assist. But by the time you’re getting 55mpg out of a gas engine without any battery assist, I would imagine it’s a pretty utilitarian driving experience.
Certainly an EV driving experience versus a 55mpg ICE is going to be absolutely no comparison.
I can see 55mpg in a plug-in hybrid as long as the battery has charge to assist. But by the time you’re getting 55mpg out of a gas engine without any battery assist, I would imagine it’s a pretty utilitarian driving experience.
Certainly an EV driving experience versus a 55mpg ICE is going to be absolutely no comparison.
While maybe not the sportiest things around, 55mpg cars are readily available and are perfectly fine and usable. Example: https://www.auto-data.net/en/volkswagen-passat-b8-facelift-2...
That’s a 150hp diesel engine.
US consumers generally don’t buy those, particularly these days. VW doesn’t even sell diesels in the US anymore.
The gas engine 2020 Passat gets 24/36 mpg city/highway.
US consumers generally don’t buy those, particularly these days. VW doesn’t even sell diesels in the US anymore.
The gas engine 2020 Passat gets 24/36 mpg city/highway.
[deleted]
[deleted]
54.5 "fleet average" MPG is about 40 MPG on the window sticker (EPA test cycle).
I would have thought passenger cars would have to be even higher than 55mpg to get a “fleet average” of 55.
What are the vehicles getting more than 55 such that passenger vehicles can get less?
What are the vehicles getting more than 55 such that passenger vehicles can get less?
EPA MPG that consumers are most familiar with is miles per gallon. Corporate Average Fuel Economy is the harmonic mean. It also gives a divisor of 0.15 for EVs and E85 cars.
> Certainly an EV driving experience versus a 55mpg ICE is going to be absolutely no comparison.
5 speed properly jetted and carb tuned Honda CRX for MPG or a Geo Metro come to mind to get those numbers and were made in the last century, other than only a K car or 3 cylinder exotic can come close. Did a Smart, which always looked like more like a toy than a car, actually get that?
I had an 1st generation CRX in university and that thing was a coffin with 4 wheels as nothing but 2 bodies fit inside. It's nothing I would say was ever comfortable by any stretch of the imagination.
I got in a bad accident in that thing due to a mechanical failure on the freeway and I'm surprised I'm still able to walk to this day as I felt every inch of that metal bend and fold upon impact. Ended up with bad hyper extension injuries to my ankle/feet (2 feet in rule in a spin) and vertebrae damage that persist to this day that made me realize MPG is not worth bodily injury.
My prius only gets 44 mph with mainly street driving, and its ok but feels like joke when its windy due to how light weight it is.
5 speed properly jetted and carb tuned Honda CRX for MPG or a Geo Metro come to mind to get those numbers and were made in the last century, other than only a K car or 3 cylinder exotic can come close. Did a Smart, which always looked like more like a toy than a car, actually get that?
I had an 1st generation CRX in university and that thing was a coffin with 4 wheels as nothing but 2 bodies fit inside. It's nothing I would say was ever comfortable by any stretch of the imagination.
I got in a bad accident in that thing due to a mechanical failure on the freeway and I'm surprised I'm still able to walk to this day as I felt every inch of that metal bend and fold upon impact. Ended up with bad hyper extension injuries to my ankle/feet (2 feet in rule in a spin) and vertebrae damage that persist to this day that made me realize MPG is not worth bodily injury.
My prius only gets 44 mph with mainly street driving, and its ok but feels like joke when its windy due to how light weight it is.
Oof, the article vividly describes the oil and auto industries' utter indifference to externalities and the monomaniacal pursuit of profit by corporate organisms. The only way you get change is through introducing an outside force which drags them along kicking and screaming. (In this case, that's the citizenry affected by those externalities electing governments which impose regulations.)
GM announcing this means they have secured their battery supply. Likely they feel there's a scramble for supply coming and they didn't want to be left behind. They also must have looked at the future of the technology and like what they see.
To secure supply they would have had to make a major deal with China, where most of the world's lithium gets processed. GM also sells more cars in China than the US (though less revenue). That also likely factored in the decision since China has announced aggressive EV targets. Given GM's integrated global production they would lose advantages of scale by having a split lineup of EVs and ICEs.
To secure supply they would have had to make a major deal with China, where most of the world's lithium gets processed. GM also sells more cars in China than the US (though less revenue). That also likely factored in the decision since China has announced aggressive EV targets. Given GM's integrated global production they would lose advantages of scale by having a split lineup of EVs and ICEs.
I wonder about the lithium after seeing musk's battery day video. He said they could do all the lithium locally (since it's not really a scarce item)
Yeah he claimed the Lithium logistics are absurd (due to market legacy) and it was easy to change the whole supply chain. I didn't hear much about it since, I simply wish it's true and not just stage-talk
GM can secure whatever they want, they don’t have the talent or culture to do anything with what they secure.
At most, GM will purchase someone else’s electric car design to use their battery supply. Then they’ll hire a contractor to build and design the factory. Then all of the staff that build it will be part time contractors from a temporary workforce company. The end result will be a piece of faulty garbage that barely drives, with nobody in the company to blame for its failure.
Most likely, GM will sell these contracts to someone who can actually execute, and they’ll make a tidy 2% profit to continue their mediocrity into the next decade.
At most, GM will purchase someone else’s electric car design to use their battery supply. Then they’ll hire a contractor to build and design the factory. Then all of the staff that build it will be part time contractors from a temporary workforce company. The end result will be a piece of faulty garbage that barely drives, with nobody in the company to blame for its failure.
Most likely, GM will sell these contracts to someone who can actually execute, and they’ll make a tidy 2% profit to continue their mediocrity into the next decade.
They have a lot of experience in every part of the car except the drive train. And once you have the battery, the rest of the drive train is.. pretty easy? I think? You're just hooking 2 motors to 2 wheels?
Someone tell me what I'm missing here.
Edit: someone down thread pointed out charging station build out.
Someone tell me what I'm missing here.
Edit: someone down thread pointed out charging station build out.
>They have a lot of experience in every part of the car except the drive train.
and to this day they cant make a truck dash that doesnt crack after 5 years in Nebraska sun.
and to this day they cant make a truck dash that doesnt crack after 5 years in Nebraska sun.
An electric drive train is mechanically a lot simpler than a combustion engine based one. But you still need a battery management and charging control system to keep the battery alive. I think that this is the other half of the battle for efficient electric cars (besides battery chemistry and manufacturing).
You could arguably say they've been working on electric drivetrains longer than anyone with the EV-1, then volt, spark, bolt, etc..
Now were they GOOD drivetrains, I don't know. There are a lot of tradeoffs there I don't understand, like is AC induction what we want, or should permanent magnets be a part of the design.
Now were they GOOD drivetrains, I don't know. There are a lot of tradeoffs there I don't understand, like is AC induction what we want, or should permanent magnets be a part of the design.
I'm really hoping that the electric car future doesn't involve every manufacturer having to build their own network of charging stations.
> GM announcing this means they have secured their battery supply.
GM has announced that they're moving away from fossil fuels, not that they were going all-electric. Granted, electric is most feasible, but they could also be hedging their bets with alternate sources like hydrogen.
GM has announced that they're moving away from fossil fuels, not that they were going all-electric. Granted, electric is most feasible, but they could also be hedging their bets with alternate sources like hydrogen.
Each fossil fuel car taken off the road means less pollution.
The only thing that remains is tires, which shed tons of toxic chemicals on the road on any car.
I'm hoping this has teeth, but the auto industry and/or governments in the US are infamous for setting ambitious long term goals, then moving the goalposts as the goal approaches. I remember the early 90s when California set EV goals by the year 1998, 2001, and 2003 (and subsequent manufacturer goals) which never materialized, and there were no consequences to the manufacturers.
GM hasn’t committed to anything, just set a goal a long enough time out that they can slip it another 5 year as it gets closer. May come true, may not. Given how they turned on a dime from one presidential administration to another, who is to say what they will do in 2024, 2028 or 2032?
They may go out of business by 2035 which would also meet their goal of zero tailpipe emissions.
They may go out of business by 2035 which would also meet their goal of zero tailpipe emissions.
They're not allowed to go out of business. They have pensions and healthcare to cover for hundreds of thousands of retirees. That's their only purpose in existing it seems.
Are you saying that GM's pensions are not pre-funded? Where did the pension payments go?
LOL.. of course not. This is a poorly run American company that comes close to bankruptcy every 20 years.
Very quick search finds a 2017 WSJ article when they were selling European assets-
“The company has European pension liabilities of $9.8 billion on its balance sheet, of which $6.5 billion is underfunded, Mr. Stevens said during an analyst call Monday. There will be an annual cash requirement of about $300 million to fund the U.K. and German pensions that remain with GM, he said.“
And that’s just the European unit..
“In the U.S., GM’s pension plan at the end of the fourth quarter 2016 had a deficit of $7.2 billion, a decrease of $3.2 billion compared with the previous quarter, according to a company transcript.”
Very quick search finds a 2017 WSJ article when they were selling European assets-
“The company has European pension liabilities of $9.8 billion on its balance sheet, of which $6.5 billion is underfunded, Mr. Stevens said during an analyst call Monday. There will be an annual cash requirement of about $300 million to fund the U.K. and German pensions that remain with GM, he said.“
And that’s just the European unit..
“In the U.S., GM’s pension plan at the end of the fourth quarter 2016 had a deficit of $7.2 billion, a decrease of $3.2 billion compared with the previous quarter, according to a company transcript.”
> the decision by G.M.’s chief executive, Mary T. Barra, that the company will aim to sell only zero-emission cars and trucks by 2035.
These are long timelines but appropriate for the type of pivot proposed.
These are long timelines but appropriate for the type of pivot proposed.
Well, GM has previously announced by 2025 to have 30 EV models. If everyone only buys those 30 then the timeline can be accelerate. It's supply/demand and my guess is that GM assumes some adopters would be slower than others.
https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/general-motors/2020/1...
https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/general-motors/2020/1...
I just bought a brand new 2020 Honda Civic EX in November and I love it, I just hope it wasn't a mistake buying a gasoline engine. Here in Canada, the carbon tax is supposed to raise the cost of gas 30 per cent by 2030. I'm not anti-carbon tax, but am I going to be driving a relic a decade from now?
Worst case scenario is $0 resale value and $2 per litre gasoline. It'll still be a good car.
That's a bit re-assuring. I had a 15-year-old standard Civic Si that was written off at under 180,000-kms because a deer ran into the side of us. It was such a great car.
I won't be happy paying $2 per litre, but it probably won't break the bank.
Who knows what COVID will do to inflation overall, though?
I won't be happy paying $2 per litre, but it probably won't break the bank.
Who knows what COVID will do to inflation overall, though?
If you can get parts for it.
Yes.
The thing about gasoline that people aren't thinking about is that
- refining the fuel and getting it to where you can physically buy it, and
- the complicated engine gubbins inside (compared to much simpler battery EVs),
...are both long logistical tails that absolutely depend on volume of custom to make their current form affordable, by hiding the large fixed costs of infrastructure.
Which means that there will be a crossover point some time in the next 30 years, and probably earlier than you'd think, when running a gasoline fuel station, a gasoline refinery, making the complicated parts, and training to install them, will no longer be commercially viable as anything other than a private hobby (like running a 1920s car, you can do it, but YOU are going to have to do all of it, there is no 1920s car mechanic in the phone book).
At this crossover point the value of a gasoline car will be either
- its value as a basis for a BEV conversion kit, probably not a whole lot as they'll be expensive and poorly suited, or
- it's value as scrap parts.
Sorry.
The thing about gasoline that people aren't thinking about is that
- refining the fuel and getting it to where you can physically buy it, and
- the complicated engine gubbins inside (compared to much simpler battery EVs),
...are both long logistical tails that absolutely depend on volume of custom to make their current form affordable, by hiding the large fixed costs of infrastructure.
Which means that there will be a crossover point some time in the next 30 years, and probably earlier than you'd think, when running a gasoline fuel station, a gasoline refinery, making the complicated parts, and training to install them, will no longer be commercially viable as anything other than a private hobby (like running a 1920s car, you can do it, but YOU are going to have to do all of it, there is no 1920s car mechanic in the phone book).
At this crossover point the value of a gasoline car will be either
- its value as a basis for a BEV conversion kit, probably not a whole lot as they'll be expensive and poorly suited, or
- it's value as scrap parts.
Sorry.
No, but the residual on a new 6cyl+ (today) after 10 years is dwindling.
Didn't think of that: no resale market...
You’ll still be in relatively good shape with the Civic.
I wonder what saltwater infiltration will do to electric cars over time in Canada. Especially once they’re not garage-queens.
I wonder what saltwater infiltration will do to electric cars over time in Canada. Especially once they’re not garage-queens.
What exactly are you concerned about?
Carbon tax going up and demand going down, driving the price of gas up.
Buying old technology that might not be as well supported, the same reason I'm holding off replacing my Intel iMac right now (waiting for an Apple Silicon iMac but a second generation that might be supported better/longer).
Buying old technology that might not be as well supported, the same reason I'm holding off replacing my Intel iMac right now (waiting for an Apple Silicon iMac but a second generation that might be supported better/longer).
GM is very very far behind, but they are now deadly serious about owning a majority of the EV market.